11th July 2024 marked the 75th year of the most significant security alliance based on collective security. The 75th NATO Summit concluded with significant strategic considerations surrounding the continuing Russia-Ukraine war. Particularly, The Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg labeled China as an influential ‘enabler’ of the Russian aggression against the Ukraine. Moreover, Stoltenberg accentuated Ukraine’s inevitable path towards joining NATO while condemning both China and Russia.  This assertion was reiterated by President Joe Biden in his press conference where he emphasized NATO’s expansion and unity for the European security in general and national security of the United States in particular. Moscow’s response maintained an accused NATO of ‘maintaining confrontation’. The 75th NATO summit and the discussion that followed call attention to the intricate dynamics of international relations today.  China’s role in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, comparing NATO’s and the United States’ standpoints regarding the Chinese actions and policies are discussed at length below.

Joe Biden, in his press conference after the conclusion of the 75th NATO summit accentuated the importance of NATO’s expansion and unity. He referred to Putin as a ‘Murderous Madman’ on an aggressive march endangering the security of the NATO member states. His statement” “Today, Kyiv still stands and NATO stands” depicts the paramount US resolve and primacy about the significance of NATO. Moreover, his press conference underscored his commitment to NATO as compared to his predecessor, Trump, asserting that Trump has the least commitment to NATO. A robust NATO is essential for the global security and the U.S. security in particular. He reiterated the expansion of NATO to include Sweden and Finland despite the differences.

The outgoing Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg stressed Ukraine’s ‘irreversible path to NATO”. Additionally, he urged the allied nations to bond against the persistent threats to democracy at the hands of aggressive Russia. The NATO military alliance has pledged around $43bn in terms of military aid to Ukraine. Moreover, NATO’s primary concern remains the cultivation of ties between Xi Jinping and Putin. Russia’s mounting dependence on North Korea and Iran remains an area of special interest and concern for NATO.

China’s role: Balancer or Enabler?

Accusing China as a ‘decisive enabler’ of the Russian aggression against the Ukraine, NATO chief said, that China’s continued to fuel the ongoing military conflict would impact its reputation and interests. China came up with a swift and critical response in the aftermath of the 75th NATO conference and the accusations instated against China. The Chinese foreign minister criticized the NATO communique by terming it as biased and invoking discord. Since the beginning of the conflict, China has maintained that its policy is to reach a political settlement and promote peace talks amidst the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Although, Beijing’s stance is based on an evident strategic ambiguity. Throughout the conflict, China has neither condemned the Russian invasion nor offered overt military support to Russia.

China’s official standing is highlighted in the 12 points of “China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis” released in Feb 2023. De-escalation of the conflict, the establishment of an interim setup, a ceasefire, and an overall cooling down of the conflict form the basis of the Chinese policy towards addressing the conflict. Choosing of side by China could potentially cause an imbalance in the already fragile international structure. China has, therefore, time and again iterated its role as a mediator and balancer rather than an ‘enabler’ in the conflict.

The United States, on the other hand, differs from the Chinese policy amidst the conflict. This conflict has become the latest point of incongruity in U.S-Sino relations. The United States holds a typical black-and-white approach based on the notion ‘either you are with us or against us’. China’s reluctance to oppose the Russian aggression is termed as a direct support to Russia.

The Sino-Russian rapprochement has deep strategic and historical roots. Owning to the strategic suppression of China, their relationship has emerged strong despite the prevalent complexities. China has effectively cashed on the economic opportunities in terms of purchasing cheap and discounted energy, providing Russia with a critical economic lifeline amidst the Western economic sanctions. However, owing to the prolonged impacts of war on Chinese global interests, China seems to be re-evaluating its position. China has continually faced supply chain shocks and sanctions, affecting its global trade interests due to the conflict. China’s efforts in the form of ‘Shuttle diplomacy’ specify its desire to minimize the long-term effects and implications of the war to maintain the global order from which it has yielded immense benefits.

Conclusively, China’s role and policies during the Russia-Ukraine conflict remain multifaceted. While NATO and the U.S. outlooks China as a potential enabler of Russian hostility against Ukraine, Beijing holds onto its standpoint of acting as a balance and mediator, advocating for political settlement and peaceful solutions to the conflict.  Such a prevalent dichotomy echoes the wider geopolitical considerations and tensions and the clatter of strategic interests between the West and China. China’s policies and actions are likely to remain under strict scrutiny and suspicion as the conflict lasts, immensely affecting international relations and global power dynamics.

Riaz Ahmed Kakar is a student currently pursuing a Bachelor's degree in International Relations at the National Defense University in Islamabad. Mr. Kakar's academic pursuits are in the fields of International Relations, Geopolitics, Climate Change, and the dynamics of International and Regional Organizations. His scholarly interests also extend to the examination of Peace and Conflicts. The author can be reached at riazokhan26@gmail.com.